About your Search

20130318
20130326
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)
. >> let me quote dick cheney, who said ronald reagan taught us that deficits do not matter. dick cheney was wrong. he was wrong then and now. of course deficits matter, but any one of you who supported the bush plans has no right to speak. i helped bill clinton balance the budget and build a surplus. why? because we had good economic times. in good economic times, you pay down the deficit, but reagan and bush did not, and in bad you have to stimulate in the near term, as thank god president obama is doing. we democrats will balance the budget once again. >> paul, which is more important to america's pursuit of happiness -- which is more dangerous, excuse me, than a 357 magnum -- >> in my home you would find 17 guns and no cans of soda pop. i have the right wing position on the giant drink soda thing. i do not like the idea, and i think bloomberg is a fine man, but i do not like government telling us what size to buy today. this one, i am with tucker and most of you. i have the right wing position on gun safety. i have the same position as ronald reagan, who was for a waiting period befo
's not certainly the same thing that he believed. and we brought up the spector of ronald reagan and he had three legs to that republican stool back then, the christian he coalition, you have the defense hawks, but you also have the small government libertarians and ronald reagan didn't preach small government because we can't afford it, but big government into the lives of american people is against the founding document. the republicans lost the argument against big government because suddenly we could afford it and look where we are now. >> megyn: it doesn't seem that rand paul is on different footing when it comes to small government. he's on different footing when it comes to foreign affairs and our military intervention. >> well, both of those positions are rooted in a constitutional argument. you can make nuanced arguments when it comes to the drone strike, you're getting lost if you thought the filibuster for 12 hours was about drones. rather seeing a republican senator stand up against the executive branch and he did something that the brilliant minds of the republican caucus had not bee
in college, it's becoming more difficult to raise children frankly in this culture. ronald reagan was very good as making what was known as reagan democrats fighting for him and i think our party has get an away from that. >> i know you have different views and come from a different place, but he was really the champion at high-level politics, hitting still on issues about sexual morality, on issues like abortion. i see the party as not moving away from those issues, even as some of the intellectual discussion in the party says that that stuff needs to be let behind. do you think that's the party's future or do you think it's only in the past? >> i would say there's two things. the mistake or trap we fall in is we allow ourselves to be singularly defined by those issues. i would argue that things like abortion is an important issue. however, we can't let our party only be about abortion. the second thing is a lot of people are looking at the demographics results and argue we need to be a different party. ultd say no. you're not foing to do that. i think the republican party has to be the s
successful in getting elected, governor ronald reagan, governor george w. bush. politics changes and the question is people are going to be looking at republican nominees from the perspective do they have the ability to lead the country. are they a leader? some of them bike bobby jindal or mickey haley or martinez of new mexico or john kas governor snyder, all these people may be able to emphasize their experience but also marco rubio, you mentioned. rand paul is going may be a candidate. i think at some point for the top spot but the second part, senator from new hampshire and governor chris christie, if he gets re-elected is going to be a player if he wants to be a player. >> greta: do you see a bigger role for the people that identify themselves as tea party candidates or do you think that freshly in light of the recent rnc report certain things like suggesting perhaps fewer debates which may be more difficult for less well known candidate. what do you see looking into the future? >> a dozen debates is going to be adequate for anybody to get known. 22 hurt the republican party
obama give the order to have these people killed? is that what you're saying? caller: ronald reagan was not hesitating that's for sure. hal: ronald reagan would have killed the american ambassador in benghazi? caller: i heard speeches of ronald reagan and they sound completely different as they do to obama. hal: you mean the speeches around iron-contra, for example. caller: and nobody's perfect. hal: nobody's perfect. >> how can you speculate how president reagan would react in today's environment? i think milltail things have changed. hal: if policies any indication, he'd be a democratic, because he'd have to change parties after he was primaried as a republican. jacki: because he was too moderate. the nature of warfare that ha changed, too. hal: george is talking out of his posterior. you can tell with the conversion from benghazi to reagan. jacki: a cooling gel might be good for that. hal: i would say to george before he calls back in and tries on another show or either on this one to push that as a paired example of presidential egregious behavior to read up on history. there ar
of democrats and ronald reagan agreed to in the 1980's which is to clean out some of these outlandish special interest tax breaks tax breaks. and i see my good friend, senator levin, here tonight and he is going to outline just some of those outlandish tax breaks. we ought to clean them out and use a portion of those dollars to hold down the rates and keep progressivity. and in the two years after democrats and republicans did that, in the 1980's the country created millions of new jobs. no one can say every one of them was due to that tax reform effort, but it certainly helped. and we had senator enzi on the floor earlier this evening, and i've been working with her on something that i think really has been missed in the tax reform debate and that is senator enzi has said when are people going to start talking about the transition rules that you would need to actually implement the tax reform plan, because today in a global economy, and senator murray and i come from a part of the world that's so trade sensitive, here we've got senator enzi talking about something very practical that ought t
more difficult to raise children frankly in this culture. and ronald reagan was good making what was known as reagan democrats feel good he was fighting for them and our party has gotten away from that. >> your candidate in the primaries, don't mean to con flat you and mr. santorum, you have different views, come from a different place, he was really the champion of cultural politics at high level republican politics, hitting still on issues about gay rights, on issues about sexual morality, on issues like abortion. i see the party as not moving away from those issues, even as some of the intellectual discussion says that stuff needs to be left behind. is that the party's future or only the past? >> i would say there's two things. one, the mistake or trap we fall in is we allow ourselves to be singularly defined by those issues. i would argue things like abortion is an important issue. however, we can't let our party only be about abortion. sometimes we fall in the trap of letting that happen. second thing, a lot of people look at demographics and election results and say we have
ronald reagan. i saw them when i went to the saddam museum in baghdad. the neocons came to power with an agenda for regime change in iraq. on 9/11 they were salivating. the general of the joint chiefs at the time told me rumsfeld, wolfowitz, all these guys started iraq, iraq, iraq, at the first meeting after 9/11. the fact is these guys had a mission to try to redraw the maps of the middle east. that's a fact. and dick cheney did not invent the idea of the executive branch being a dictatorship when it comes to foreign policy in america. unfortunately president obama has continued some of the things cheney, rumsfeld and these guys laid the groundwork for earlier. my god, cheney headed up halliburton for the 1990s. he had oil on the mind all the time. the irony is the u.s. isn't winning the oil in iraq. these guys failed at their own game, the neocons. >> mike, as you look forward at iraq's, from iraq's current position into the future, what are your expectations for that nation? >> it's a great question, martin. you know, it's the crucial question, as we think about this day. i wa
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)